How rich kids already won the career game • Hacker News Board

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#111

Post by barrkel » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:12 PM UTC

ramanujan wrote: post #34

hartror wrote: post #13

I think this article is preaching to the wrong crowd here on HN. A entrepreneur is by definition an upstart, an usurper who is out to break the conventions. You can't do this by being a quite yes man. That said what percentage of entrepreneurs, successful or not come from rich backgrounds? This article's ideas would apply two fold to the startup arena where you cannot get anywhere simply by running on the hamster whe…

Relatedly, 60% of NBA Stars are bankrupt within 5 years after retirement: http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3469271 Filing for bankruptcy is a long-standing tradition for NBA players, 60% of whom, according to the Toronto Star, are broke five years after they retire. So it's not completely true that wealth is an advantage that cannot be squandered. And in the US there was a saying that used to be more popula…

Note that in more rigid societies in particular, wealth can be somewhat uncorrelated with status. Being the child of a notable family with a lot of connections can give one more opportunities, even if the family (or that branch of it) is not actually very well off.

Re sports players going broke, I think that's because they acquire a lifestyle proportionate to their income at an age when they're too young to understand that their lifetime income is front-loaded. For the first 5 or 10 years of their career, they only move up in value and income; they're not fully aware that they're going to fall off an income cliff, and they ought to be spending no more than 10 to 20% of what they earn on consumption.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#112

Post by Duff » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:13 PM UTC

Maro wrote: post #98

Duff wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the scenario in this article works in some banks, law firms and other places that give a hoot about Ivy League connections and hire a few proles to avoid being painted as a company full of elitists.

So doing a startup is not about connections? LOL. Having good connection is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition to identifying customer pain points, finding VC money, doing sales, etc.

Never said that.

The article isn't about entrepreneurs, which are an entirely different type of person that makes different kinds of mistakes. An entrepreneur isn't afraid of making mistakes, regardless of his place in the social order. That's why he's starting a company instead of working for a bank.

The example given in the article was: "two analysts at a prestigious financial firm". A "prestigious financial firm" is not a startup, and while networking is important, it isn't the same networking/hustle that a entrepreneur engages in.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#113

Post by barrkel » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:14 PM UTC

epochwolf wrote: post #101

JonnieCache wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think things are a bit different in the US.

Parent said this was in New York State.

I understood JonnieCache to be highlighting how different things are in the US to most of the rest of the world.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#114

Post by samtp » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:17 PM UTC

jobu wrote: post #97

Alex3917 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"His point was that rich kids have better attitudes, skills and perceived work ethic which is simply not true." I mean I can point you to any number of academic studies confirming this, e.g. Hart & Risley's Meaningful Differences book. Or just go to any elite private university and compare the kids who are there during summer session with the kids who are there during the rest of the year. The only real difference is…

You could probably say the same thing about the summer session at most universities. The kids willing to give up their summers for education have a different level of drive than the ones that attend the rest of the year. Not that summer session is always the best course of action. An internship will go a lot further toward most careers than a few extra classes.

> You could probably say the same thing about the summer session at most universities

Not really. The summer session at most state schools is like the summer sessions in public high schools. Mostly people who failed a class or couldn't register for the one they needed

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#115

Post by yummyfajitas » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:21 PM UTC

zeemonkee wrote: post #103

danssig wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That's what my generation believed. And my parents' generation. And their parents That doesn't mean it will never happen. The world is changing rapidly, it stands to reason that even more big changes could happen. I think "human nature" is a bit of a red herring. We don't currently have any scientific way to separate how much of how people behave is social/environment programming and how much is "human nature".

> That doesn't mean it will never happen. The world is changing rapidly, it stands to reason that even more big changes could happen. Rapidly compared to what ? 1900-1960 arguably saw more significant cultural, technological and political change than 1960-2010. The internet and mobile phone are about the only significant technological breakthroughs in my lifetime - in fact even they happened before my lifetime, but w…

Modern logistics (c.f. Walmart) is a hugely significant technological breakthrough, and is arguably the foundation of our modern economy. It's not obvious to consumers because it happened behind the scenes, but don't neglect it's significance.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#116

Post by tomkarlo » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:22 PM UTC

watty wrote: post #59

This was an whiny and awful post about "life isn't fair". The socially outgoing and confident worker will always outperform his socially awkward counterpart of equal intelligence. It doesn't matter that he came from a wealthy family, what matters is he has MORE skills. It isn't discrimination until you start hiring the less wealthy (with less skills) because of the fact that they're less wealthy.

Seconded. And it's worth noting that the percentage of people in the US whose parents make >$10M a year is so small that it's unlikely that anyone knows enough of them to make statistically valid assumptions about their performance relative to kids from more median backgrounds.

You'd need to know or track 1000+ of those individuals to find statistical significant in a phenomenon that's probably a few percentage points in size. It makes the article very hard to disagree with in a concrete way (since I doubt any of us know that many trust funders) but I doubt the OP really has that level of data either.

This is just a long anecdotal gripe based on a few data points.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#117

Post by zeemonkee » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:24 PM UTC

danssig wrote: post #107

zeemonkee wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That doesn't mean it will never happen. The world is changing rapidly, it stands to reason that even more big changes could happen. Rapidly compared to what ? 1900-1960 arguably saw more significant cultural, technological and political change than 1960-2010. The internet and mobile phone are about the only significant technological breakthroughs in my lifetime - in fact even they happened before my lifetime, but w…

>The internet and mobile phone are about the only significant technological breakthroughs in my lifetime I don't know if you've noticed but these two are having some very large impact in the world right now. Dictators of 30 and 40 years are being cast off. >Well, we do have millenia of recorded history. Social mores may change, human nature less so. I think that's a pretty skewed view of history. Another way to see i…

> I don't know if you've noticed but these two are having some very large impact in the world right now. Dictators of 30 and 40 years are being cast off.

I'm sure the Jacobins had a totally cool Facebook page.

> Now you could say that even if we ever managed to get to a utopia state more greedy people will just show up but I would counter argue that e.g. Alexander the great wouldn't have gotten off the ground if people could have just sent a twitter to warn everyone else what he was up to.

That has to be the funniest thing I've read all day. If only poor King Darius III had a Twitter account.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#118

Post by barrkel » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:27 PM UTC

MarkPNeyer wrote: post #100

Locke1689 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insults do not ad hominem make. Not to say that it was a good comment to begin with.

if insults don't make an argument ad hominem, what does?

"He's an asshole, but he makes a good point."

Not ad hominem, not trying to refute the argument, but still an insult.

"He's an asshole, and his argument is crap."

Not ad hominem, refuting the argument by mere assertion, and an insult.

"He's an asshole, so his argument can't be taken seriously."

Ad hominem - implying that some characteristic of the person makes his argument flawed; and an insult.

"He just wants what's best for his daughter, so his argument can't be taken seriously."

Ad hominem (implying bias); but not an insult.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#119

Post by drzaiusapelord » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:30 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #85

Yes, being rich can make you confident which can do well for your career. But there are plenty of other unfair advantages that also bring confidence, like height or good looks. And then there are really horribly unfair things like intelligence.

I'm tall and am/was arguably somewhat good looking. I don't get many, if any, advantages from this because I grew up as and am a pretty serious geek. Now that I'm older I have better social skills, but because of how I turned out I never got the benefits of this. Without the proper attitude even looks aren't helpful. It took me a long time to learn proper social skills and I feel ten years behind my peers. This is typical in technology. I wont even go into how tech is this ghetto that rich kids never bother with anyway, they are just on the fast track to management.

On the other hand money is concrete and real. If I had 5 million in the bank my attitude would be 100% different. I wouldn't be considered geeky, I'd be geek-chic and eccentric. I wouldn't have most of the anxities I have now because I know money can buy me almost everything I need.

Sorry, but large sums of money are nowhere comparable to less tangible gifts like height or looks. One buys me a home the other maybe gets me an occasional second glance.

I'll also toss in that thinking of yourself as a social peer with your bosses is a huge benefit. The book "Outliers" explores this. Well-off kids are raised to be assertive and have a sense of entitlement. They just do better in life. They can defend these attitudes by saying "I come from a well off family, just as wealthy as you. I went to the same school as you and your kids and my parents know the same people. I was taught to get my way and that my parents will protect me with their riches."

Lately, coincidentally, I have a lot in common with my current bosses. The social parts take care of themselves and its a huge benefit without me putting in a lot of effort. I don't feel the divide between them and me as much as at my previous jobs. I have a small amount of savings that can help me get by if I get fired or laid off. If this is how rich kids feel at age 23 when entering the workforce then they have a HUGE advantage.

Re: How rich kids already won the career game

#120

Post by yummyfajitas » Mon, Mar 07, 2011, 4:31 PM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #102

jobu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could probably say the same thing about the summer session at most universities. The kids willing to give up their summers for education have a different level of drive than the ones that attend the rest of the year. Not that summer session is always the best course of action. An internship will go a lot further toward most careers than a few extra classes.

"The kids willing to give up their summers for education have a different level of drive than the ones that attend the rest of the year." Not really, if anything it takes less drive. It's vastly easier to take classes over the summer (when classes are usually easier), and then do your internships in fall or spring when there's no competition. The only reason not everyone does this is that it wouldn't be financially v…

Since when can you not apply financial aid to summer classes? When I was in college (10 years ago), the rule was 2 semesters/year.

Summer usually wasn't viable because class selection is limited. For example, Quantum Mechanics 1 is fall semester, Quantum Mechanics 2 is spring semester, and you need both to graduate.